Laserfiche WebLink
App�aved <br />0otion by Baker, second by Schiferl to CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. <br />6 ayes, 0 nays. MOTION APPROVED. <br />Motion by Baker, second by O'Brien to RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE AMENDMENT. <br />Mann asked if there is a limit on how many silos should be allowed. Zisla replied that the only thing that is <br />being changed within the accessory structure code is the increase of the height by ten feet. <br />6 ayes, 0 nays. Motion Approved. <br />Public Hearings: S112007-013, 1�112007-010 Special Use Permit and Site Plan to Permit Two, 48' Tall Silos. <br />The applicant is requesting a Special Use Permit in order to permit two, 48' tall silos at 1565 Is` Avenue NW. <br />This request will be reviewed against the standards proposed by the Zoning Code amendment that would allow <br />an accessory structure to exceed 40 feet. In addition to the Special Use Permit, the applicant must also obtain <br />Site Plan approval. A Site Plan review is required anytime a commercial or industrial property makes an <br />exterior improvement to the site. <br />A building permit was issued in March of 2006 for this property. The description of work noted on the building <br />permit application was "concrete pads and bases, concrete block". Included in the plan set for this building <br />lrmit was a silo, which is an accessory structure and typically requires zoning review and approval. No <br />ights were noted on the plan and the Building Official approved the plan and released the permit without a <br />zoning review. All the other improvements were for the interior of the building. The contractor proceeded to <br />erect a 48' silo on the property. Not until a second permit was received for an additional silo, and a zoning <br />review was conducted, did staff understand the regulatory issues of a 48' silo. Specifically, structures in excess <br />of 40' are not allowed anywhere in the City (exceptions are water towers, public utilities, and specially <br />permitted uses in the MX and NWQ district). After consulting with the City Attorney, it was noted that the <br />existing 48' silo is illegal and City staff could not legally release a building permit for a second such silo. <br />Baker asked the applicant if they have seen the site maintenance issues noted in the report and if they would <br />agree to fix them. The applicant replied that they are aware of the issues and it would be addressed. <br />Motion by O'Brien, second by Mann to CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. <br />6 ayes, 0 nays. MOTION APPROVED. <br />Schiferl asked if the sign on the silo is a legal sign. Gundlach replied that she does not know how large the sign <br />is, but could be considered as an allowable wall sign. While it potentially is taller than normally approved, it is <br />set back rurther than required by code. Staff would recommend accepting the sign in lue of the freeway ground <br />sign that is normally allowed. Schiferl asked if it is acceptable to the City attorney. Gundlach replied that she <br />did not inquire about this specific issue. The applicant replied that the sign is painted on and would not be <br />easily removed. The second silo would not have a sign placed on it. <br />Olotion by O'Brien, second by Schiferl to APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL USE PERMFI' TO PERMIT <br />"TWO, 48' SILOS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1565 V AVENUE NW, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING: <br />Page 9 of'] 2 <br />